切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2024, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (02) : 157 -161. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2024.02.007

临床研究

钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生疗效的影响因素
曾明辉1,(), 蒋东方1, 秦锁炳1   
  1. 1. 212300 江苏,丹阳市人民医院泌尿外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-04-04 出版日期:2024-04-01
  • 通信作者: 曾明辉
  • 基金资助:
    镇江市社会发展指导性科技计划(FZ2021007)

The influence factors of holmium laser prostate enucleation in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

Minghui Zeng1,(), Dongfang Jiang1, Suobing Qin1   

  1. 1. Department of Urology, Danyang People's Hospital, Jiangsu 212300, China
  • Received:2023-04-04 Published:2024-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Minghui Zeng
引用本文:

曾明辉, 蒋东方, 秦锁炳. 钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生疗效的影响因素[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 157-161.

Minghui Zeng, Dongfang Jiang, Suobing Qin. The influence factors of holmium laser prostate enucleation in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(02): 157-161.

目的

探究前列腺增生(BPH)患者接受钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)疗效的影响因素。

方法

回顾性分析丹阳市人民医院100例接受HoLEP治疗的BPH患者的临床资料,纳入时间2018年6月至2021年6月,根据临床疗效将患者分为疗效良好组(83例)、疗效不佳组(17例)。采用单因素和多因素Logistic回归分析BPH患者HoLEP疗效的影响因素;采用ROC曲线分析术前残余尿量、最大逼尿肌压力、前列腺切除率预测BPH患者HoLEP疗效不佳的价值。

结果

单因素分析显示,与疗效良好组相比,疗效不佳组年龄71~80岁、病程≥5年、术前国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)评分8~35分的患者比例较高,并且疗效不佳组术前残余尿量较多、最大逼尿肌压力较小、前列腺切除率较低(P<0.05);经ROC曲线分析,术前残余尿量≥51.740 ml、最大逼尿肌压力≤99.958 cmH2O、前列腺切除率≤51.395%是预测BPH患者HoLEP疗效不佳的最佳截断值(P<0.05);经多因素Logistic回归分析,高龄、病程≥5年、术前IPSS评分较高、术前残余尿量较多、最大逼尿肌压力较小、前列腺切除率较低是BPH患者HoLEP疗效不佳的危险因素(P<0.05)。

结论

采用HoLEP治疗BPH患者可能受到患者年龄、病程、术前IPSS评分、前列腺切除率等因素影响,此外术前残余尿量≥51.740 ml、最大逼尿肌压力≤99.958 cmH2O的患者术后疗效不佳的风险较高,临床应重点关注。

Objective

To explore the influence factors of holmium laser prostate enucleation (HoLEP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Methods

Retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 100 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia who received HoLEP in Danyang People's hospital from June 2018 to June 2021. According to the clinical efficacy, the patients were divided into good efficacy group (83 cases) and poor efficacy group (17 cases). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to analyze the influencing factors of the efficacy of HoLEP in patients with BPH. ROC curve was used to analyze the value of residual urine volume, maximum detrusor pressure, and prostatectomy rate in predicting the poor efficacy of HoLEP in patients with BPH.

Results

Univariate analysis showed that compared with the group with good curative effect, the proportion of patients with poor curative effect was higher in the age of 71 to 80 years, the course of disease ≥5 years, and the preoperative international prostate symptom score (IPSS) score of 8 to 35 points, and the group with poor curative effect had more residual urine volume, lower maximum detrusor pressure, and lower prostatectomy rate (P<0.05). According to ROC analysis, preoperative residual urine volume ≥ 51.740 ml, maximum detrusor pressure ≤99.958 cm H2O, and prostatectomy rate ≤51.395% were the cutoff values for poor efficacy of HoLEP in BPH patients (P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that advanced age, course of disease ≥5 years, high preoperative IPSS score, significant preoperative residual urine volume, reduced maximum detrusor pressure, and low prostatectomy rate were risk factors for poor efficacy of HoLEP in BPH patients (P<0.05).

Conclusions

HoLEP for patients with BPH may be affected by the patient's age, course of disease, preoperative IPSS score, prostatectomy rate and other factors. In addition, patients with preoperative residual urine volume ≥51.740 ml, maximum detrusor pressure ≤99.958 cm H2O have a higher risk of poor postoperative efficacy, which should be paid more attention.

表1 BPH患者钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)疗效的单因素分析
组别 例数 年龄[例(%)] BMI[kg/m2,(±s)] 病程[例(%)] 急性尿潴留[例(%)] 术前QOL评分[分,(±s)]
50~60岁 61~70岁 71~80岁 ≥5年 <5年
疗效不佳组 17 3(17.65) 5(29.41) 9(52.94) 23.6±3.1 12(70.59) 5(29.41) 3(17.65) 4.19±0.43
疗效良好组 83 40(48.19) 28(33.73) 15(18.07) 23.2±3.0 35(42.17) 48(57.83) 11(13.25) 4.08±0.52
统计值   χ2=10.290 t=0.565 χ2=4.575 χ2=0.226 t=0.816
P   0.006 0.573 0.032 0.634 0.417
组别 术前IPSS评分[例(%)] 增生类型[例(%)] 前列腺体积[ml,(±s)] 术前残余尿量[ml,(±s)]
0~7分 8~19分 20~35分 侧叶、中叶增生 颈下叶增生 侧叶及颈下叶增生 侧叶、中叶及及颈下叶增生
疗效不佳组 3(17.65) 9(52.94) 5(29.41) 4(23.53) 7(41.18) 4(23.53) 2(11.76) 64±11 58±6
疗效良好组 39(46.99) 35(42.17) 9(10.84) 12(14.46) 31(37.35) 25(30.12) 15(18.07) 66±11 46±5
统计值 χ2=6.739 χ2=1.322 t=0.699 t=8.762
P 0.034 0.724 0.486 <0.001
组别 术前最大逼尿肌压力[cmH2O,(±s)] 手术时间[h,(±s)] 术中出血量[ml,(±s)] 前列腺切除量[g,(±s)] 前列腺切除率(%) 剜除效率[g/min,(±s)] 术前前列腺特异性抗原[ng/ml,(±s)] 术前血红蛋白[g/L,(±s)]
疗效不佳组 99.1±2.4 1.3±0.4 31±6 49±11 47±13 0.81±0.23 3.31±0.26 135±15
疗效良好组 100.9±2.9 1.2±0.3 32±5 55±12 58±16 0.77±0.21 3.26±0.24 132±17
统计值 t=2.276 t=0.638 t=0.841 t=1.817 t=2.650 t=0.704 t=0.772 t=0.595
P 0.025 0.525 0.402 0.072 0.009 0.483 0.442 0.553
图1 预测BPH患者钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)疗效不佳的ROC曲线
表2 术前残余尿量、最大逼尿肌压力、前列腺切除率预测BPH患者钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)疗效不佳的价值
表3 BPH患者HoLEP疗效不佳的多因素Logistic回归分析
[1]
Lokeshwar SD, Harper BT, Webb E, et al. Epidemiology and treatment modalities for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. Transl Androl Urol, 2019, 8(5): 529-539.
[2]
Meng C, Peng L, Li J, et al. Comparison of enucleation between thulium laser and holmium laser for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Asian J Surg, 2022, 45(2): 689-697.
[3]
Das AK, Han TM, Hardacker TJ. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): size-independent gold standard for surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. Can J Urol, 2020, 27(S3): 44-50.
[4]
Mostafa MM, Patil N, Khalil M, et al. Is Holmium laser enucleation of prostate equally effective in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia patients with either voiding or storage lower urinary tract symptoms? A comparative study[J]. Arch Ital Urol Androl, 2022, 94(2): 174-179.
[5]
王东, 窦小亮, 付晓亮, 等. 索利那新对2型糖尿病合并良性前列腺增生患者术后并发症和性功能的影响[J]. 中国性科学, 2019, 28(8): 8-11.
[6]
曹庆生, 吴珠青, 程锦宇, 等. 经尿道等离子纽扣式电极前列腺剜切术治疗前列腺增生的临床疗效[J]. 安徽医学, 2019, 40(7): 796-798.
[7]
那彦群, 叶章群, 孙颖浩, 等. 中国泌尿外科疾病诊断治疗指南手册: 2014版[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2014: 245-245.
[8]
孙自学, 宋春生, 邢俊平, 等. 良性前列腺增生中西医结合诊疗指南(试行版)[J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2017, 23(3): 280-285.
[9]
张绍斌, 龚杰. PKRP治疗良性前列腺增生的效果及对患者性功能的影响[J]. 中国性科学, 2018, 27(12): 18-20.
[10]
斯钦布和, 易发现, 王国强, 等. 经尿道前列腺剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生疗效观察[J]. 局解手术学杂志, 2019, 28(11): 891-895.
[11]
Zell MA, Abdul-Muhsin H, Navaratnam A, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for very large benign prostatic hyperplasia (≥ 200 cc)[J]. World J Urol, 2021, 39(1): 129-134.
[12]
Li J, Cao D, Huang Y, et al. Holmium laser enucleation versus bipolar transurethral enucleation for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia, which one is better?[J]. Aging Male, 2021, 24(1): 160-170.
[13]
姚宏涛, 孔令强, 徐军, 等. 膀胱逼尿肌压力与良性前列腺增生患者TURP术后排尿情况相关性分析[J]. 中国性科学, 2017, 26(8): 11-13.
[14]
龚刚, 徐彦钢, 钟钦, 等. 良性前列腺增生并发逼尿肌活动低下的危险因素分析及风险列线图预测模型的建立[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2022, 37(8): 615-619.
[15]
贾博深, 杨登科, 韩成涛, 等. 良性前列腺增生患者HoLEP术后疗效预测的模型分析[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2021, 26(9): 743-748.
[16]
颜学槐. 补肾益气通淋方联合神阙穴隔盐灸对良性前列腺增生症术后排尿功能障碍患者逼尿肌功能及尿动力学的影响[J]. 现代中西医结合杂志, 2021, 30(6): 650-653.
[17]
Radwan A, Farouk A, Higazy A, et al. Prostatic artery embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia[J]. Prostate Int, 2020, 8(3): 130-133.
[18]
Ahmad MS, Dar YA, Khawaja AR, et al. Comparative study of tamsulosin versus tadalafil in benign prostatic hyperplasia patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. A prospective randomized study[J]. Urol Ann, 2022, 14(3): 236-240.
[19]
黄兴, 罗仪, 訾豪, 等. 前列腺组织切除量及切除率与前列腺等离子双极电切术短期临床疗效的相关性[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2021, 26(1): 16-20, 74.
[1] 李辉, 尉维录, 吴茂林. 经直肠剪切波弹性成像对存在下尿路症状的前列腺病变良恶性的鉴别诊断价值及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(11): 1193-1198.
[2] 汪洋, 李志鹏, 张楠, 何海填, 杨伟锋, 张焕灵, 王可兵. 保护射精技术在前列腺等离子剜除术中的应用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 152-156.
[3] 梅鑫, 张世科, 张巧珍, 吴文起. 前列腺增生导致下尿路症状手术时机的研究进展[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 96-99.
[4] 熊风, 林辉煌, 陈晓波. 铥激光在泌尿外科中的临床应用及研究进展[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 533-536.
[5] 韩广玮, 申雪晴, 吴涵潇, 曹炎武, 唐黎明. 前列腺增生并轻度尿道狭窄行去外鞘半导体激光汽化剜除与等离子电切的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 490-494.
[6] 李全喜, 唐辉军, 唐友杰, 杨飞. DISCO成像技术在前列腺增生与前列腺癌鉴别诊断中的应用价值[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 332-335.
[7] 赖良海, 赵伟, 肖云新, 杨伟明, 陈光耀. 1 470 nm激光"平均三分法"剜除术与等离子剜除术治疗前列腺增生的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 252-256.
[8] 李国峰, 李显文, 周祥福, 何昊麟, 杜红兵, 宾开云. 单极滚珠电极与等离子行经尿道前列腺剜除术的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 247-251.
[9] 金敬苗, 韦巍, 钟羽翔, 麦源, 黄剑华, 赵朋朋, 林富祥, 李旷怡, 徐战平. 侧卧位微创经皮肾镜联合Y形负压吸引鞘治疗中老年铸型结石的研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 144-148.
[10] 李晓山, 刘巍, 魏世平. 双J管-Folys导尿管捆绑复合体在输尿管镜钬激光碎石术中的应用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 154-156.
[11] 邹志辉, 张礼刚, 胡永涛, 牛迪, 陈佳, 葛秦涛, 尹水平, 杨诚, 施浩强, 邰胜, 周骏, 郝宗耀, 梁朝朝. 无线智能高清内镜在经尿道双极等离子解剖性前列腺剜除术中的应用初探[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(01): 39-43.
[12] 游猛, 顾志文, 宋生生, 张贺庆, 詹河涓. 等离子电切术与钬激光剜除术治疗体积>80 ml前列腺增生的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(01): 44-49.
[13] 顾志波, 苏倩, 陈建刚, 陆明. 低功率钬激光与等离子剜除治疗中等体积前列腺增生的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 496-500.
[14] 张宁, 张梦菲, 邱建新, 高闫尧, 陈育, 高靖榆. 腹腔镜下经尿道等离子电切术联合疝环充填式无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟斜疝合并前列腺良性增生[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 441-444.
[15] 李德新, 牟成金, 李飞, 赵晓晨, 廖东旭, 汪旭, 董科. 钬激光在炎性胆管柱状狭窄的初步探讨[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(12): 1207-1210.
阅读次数
全文


摘要